You can't see it, but 'trust the science!'

a reply to: LordAhriman

What's with the redneck slurs?

So answer the thread's main question: Do you share Newsom's view?

Seems silly to debate science you're not allowed to see.

a reply to: loam

This is the same $hit the Catholics pulled on Christians.

Begin the great crusades of scientism.

What happen to separation of church and state.

History repeating itself again.

Their cross 💉 and their shield 😷

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: LordAhriman

What's with the redneck slurs?

So answer the thread's main question: Do you share Newsom's view?

Seems silly to debate science you're not allowed to see.

Have you ever seen a virus with your bare eyes?

a reply to: LordAhriman

I can barely read your posts.

Answer the question.

a reply to: loam

While I understand the sentiment, statistics are often misconstrued when presented at a "consumer" level (the more complex, the worse), it should be made available. If there is actually anything there. If the dog didn't eat it.

State health officials said they rely on a very complex set of measurements that would confuse and potentially mislead the public if they were made public.

Sorry California. The world of 2021 isn't the world of ~1438 (pre-Gutenberg).

"It's too complicated for the mere public to understand!" are the words of elites guarding money and power.

So try us and release the information. Which should be available anyway.

a reply to: loam

This is the new norm Loam, get used to it, you do as I say well because I tell you so. All the whistleblowers in the beginning of the control of the now totalitarian regime in California were run out of the states when they dared to tell the truth and went against the Governor policies.

Most of the democrats control states took this approach in order to control the masses.

Do as I tell you and no questions ask slaves.

Today I dined in freedom with many people around all healthy and happy, from old to young, this the way is been since the first wave of scaremongering here in my state, freedom is something people should never take for granted.

a reply to: Phage

Anything can be misconstrued.

But free societies hold their secrets as an exception to the rule. That's not the direction we've been going for a very long time.

Some of us are pretty concerned by that.

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: LordAhriman

What's with the redneck slurs?

So answer the thread's main question: Do you share Newsom's view?

Seems silly to debate science you're not allowed to see.

Have you ever seen a virus with your bare eyes?

No. But I can smell BS a mile away

Edit: how does this strengthen the governments attempt to get us on board? Isn’t it a pandemic? Shouldn’t we by kept abreast of wtf is goin on? Besides CNN’s doom tally?

This just makes everything they say/have said look really suspect.

This has been going on for a long time, it is nothing new. Any evidence the FDA considers relevant has to be approved by the FDA before it can be considered. You can have lots of proof and it does not mean anything if they do not approve the evidence as relevant. They do this a lot in that agency and others in our country, same in the judicial system, only evidence they approve as relevant can be used.

That is the way it is, we have to believe what they tell us to believe, that has been that way for many decades. Why would it change now. The heads of health in the states know this, it is kind of common knowledge in those agencies. You cannot fight city hall, learn to accept that.

State health officials said they rely on a very complex set of measurements that would confuse and potentially mislead the public if they were made public.

So then, we are left to assume that the health officials have a good understanding of the set of measurements used and what the end data means and how it should be applied to the real life situation. I doubt that any of these "officials" actually have an indepth understanding of this system and could explain it in layman's terms, much less with technical ones.

When I learned about different subjects in school, like drafting for instance, we started out with a drafting board, pencils, paper, and tools like rulers, straight edges, and triangles and were taught how to render a 3-D model based on measurements from different views of an object. I did a full architectural rendering in 3-D of the 2 story house I lived at when I took drafting. All I needed was a tape measure, a ruler, 2 triangles (optional), a compass (optional), a pencil and a piece of paper. I knew what I was doing and could explain it to anyone. CAD was in it's infancy then, but today I suspect draftsmen have the basic concept of the process, but are more skilled at data entry.

So are these officials "experts" that know the material so well that they can offer an explanation in terms that anyone could understand, or are they just condescending authority figures that haven't any real explanations to give?

a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

So are these officials "experts" that know the material so well that they can offer an explanation in terms that anyone could understand, or are they just condescending authority figures that haven't any real explanations to give?

I'm going with B.